Difference between revisions of "Pages 183-190"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
==Created by Matthew Walsh== | ==Created by Matthew Walsh== | ||
| − | ==Summary== | + | ==Summary of Bone from a Dry Sea== |
In this chapter Vinny and her dad are preparing to leave the camp after Dr. Hamiska fired Vinny's dad for supporting his daughter when she refused to do a photo with the humanoid bone. When Vinny and her dad prepare to get in the jeep to leave the camp, a helicopter appeared on the horizon. Everyone was so excited that it might be the Craig people, but worried that they came early. As the helicopter grew closer, it struck everyone that it was an army helicopter, not a civilian one. When it landed, Mr. Multan, the minister, came out of the chopper and immediately accused Dr. Hamiska of digging off of the agreed dig site. After a long argument about borders, Mr. Multan bans Dr. Hamiska from digging on his land and makes his nephew, Watson, the head of the dig. Watson, because he is really nice, re-hires Vinny's dad on the job because he needs his experience AND he allows him to take Vinny on her promised safari to make this dig into a vacation as well. | In this chapter Vinny and her dad are preparing to leave the camp after Dr. Hamiska fired Vinny's dad for supporting his daughter when she refused to do a photo with the humanoid bone. When Vinny and her dad prepare to get in the jeep to leave the camp, a helicopter appeared on the horizon. Everyone was so excited that it might be the Craig people, but worried that they came early. As the helicopter grew closer, it struck everyone that it was an army helicopter, not a civilian one. When it landed, Mr. Multan, the minister, came out of the chopper and immediately accused Dr. Hamiska of digging off of the agreed dig site. After a long argument about borders, Mr. Multan bans Dr. Hamiska from digging on his land and makes his nephew, Watson, the head of the dig. Watson, because he is really nice, re-hires Vinny's dad on the job because he needs his experience AND he allows him to take Vinny on her promised safari to make this dig into a vacation as well. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
===Bias=== | ===Bias=== | ||
| − | We can never tell wether or not all written documents and artifacts from the past are accurate due to the fact that most of these were written by well-educated rich men. This leaves us with ideas only seen from the view points of rich men, excluding lower-class and women. It is very probable that most evidence from the past does not accurately tell what really happened because the stories were only written by a small fraction of the population. | + | We can never tell wether or not all written documents and artifacts from the past are accurate due to the fact that most of these were written by well-educated rich men. This leaves us with ideas only seen from the view points of rich men, excluding lower-class and women. It is very probable that most evidence from the past does not accurately tell what really happened because the stories were only written by a small fraction of the population. This is one of the six main reasons it is hard to follow History according to Edwin Fenton. |
| + | Cite: Manual Page 8 | ||
| + | |||
| + | ====How to approach Biases as a Historian==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | There are three very broad ways to approach analyzing data with Biases | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====1.===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Traditional: The Traditional approach depends on the civilization you are studying. The main point is to look at famous Historical figures in that civilization and usually is very positive. This is how we are taught in school. An example is George Washington, because he did so many great things for us we are biased to believe that he had little fault, he was a hero, while Great Britain may analyze the story differently. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====2.====== | ||
| + | Revisionist: The revisionist approach is the opposite of the traditional approach. It is the view point of the losers. Still using our Washington example, let's say we view it from the British side of the story. They are Biased to believe that George Washington must have been bad to try to resist the "greatness" of their country and that he must have been an amazing general to have beaten us in combat. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====3.===== | ||
| + | Post-Revisionist: The post-revisionist approach is the most difficult, but the most accurate. It involves analyzing both the Revisionist and Traditional views at the same time. You have to ignore the controversy and anything that is agrees upon from both sides is most likely correct. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is also why it is so very hard for Historians to analyze what really happened. If one civilization beat another but burned all the losing sides records, we are only left with the traditional views, making it hard to trust the data given. | ||
| + | Source:http://keviin.hubpages.com/hub/Bias_In_Reporting_History | ||
| + | Credit goes to:Keviin | ||
| + | |||
| + | I know this is a .com but I did some external research on the topic and while there are other ways of analyzing data, these are three of the most important. | ||
Revision as of 22:28, 9 September 2012
Contents
Bone from a Dry Sea pages 183-190
History 8 Archaeology Bone From a Dry Sea
Created by Matthew Walsh
Summary of Bone from a Dry Sea
In this chapter Vinny and her dad are preparing to leave the camp after Dr. Hamiska fired Vinny's dad for supporting his daughter when she refused to do a photo with the humanoid bone. When Vinny and her dad prepare to get in the jeep to leave the camp, a helicopter appeared on the horizon. Everyone was so excited that it might be the Craig people, but worried that they came early. As the helicopter grew closer, it struck everyone that it was an army helicopter, not a civilian one. When it landed, Mr. Multan, the minister, came out of the chopper and immediately accused Dr. Hamiska of digging off of the agreed dig site. After a long argument about borders, Mr. Multan bans Dr. Hamiska from digging on his land and makes his nephew, Watson, the head of the dig. Watson, because he is really nice, re-hires Vinny's dad on the job because he needs his experience AND he allows him to take Vinny on her promised safari to make this dig into a vacation as well.
Bias
We can never tell wether or not all written documents and artifacts from the past are accurate due to the fact that most of these were written by well-educated rich men. This leaves us with ideas only seen from the view points of rich men, excluding lower-class and women. It is very probable that most evidence from the past does not accurately tell what really happened because the stories were only written by a small fraction of the population. This is one of the six main reasons it is hard to follow History according to Edwin Fenton. Cite: Manual Page 8
How to approach Biases as a Historian
There are three very broad ways to approach analyzing data with Biases
1.
Traditional: The Traditional approach depends on the civilization you are studying. The main point is to look at famous Historical figures in that civilization and usually is very positive. This is how we are taught in school. An example is George Washington, because he did so many great things for us we are biased to believe that he had little fault, he was a hero, while Great Britain may analyze the story differently.
2.=
Revisionist: The revisionist approach is the opposite of the traditional approach. It is the view point of the losers. Still using our Washington example, let's say we view it from the British side of the story. They are Biased to believe that George Washington must have been bad to try to resist the "greatness" of their country and that he must have been an amazing general to have beaten us in combat.
3.
Post-Revisionist: The post-revisionist approach is the most difficult, but the most accurate. It involves analyzing both the Revisionist and Traditional views at the same time. You have to ignore the controversy and anything that is agrees upon from both sides is most likely correct.
This is also why it is so very hard for Historians to analyze what really happened. If one civilization beat another but burned all the losing sides records, we are only left with the traditional views, making it hard to trust the data given. Source:http://keviin.hubpages.com/hub/Bias_In_Reporting_History Credit goes to:Keviin
I know this is a .com but I did some external research on the topic and while there are other ways of analyzing data, these are three of the most important.
